5.1 In civil proceedings evidence should not be excluded on the ground that it is hearsay. We further recommend that multiple hearsay as well as simple hearsay should henceforth be admissible.

(paragraphs 4.1 to 4.6; clause 1)

5.2 Existing statutory provisions making hearsay evidence admissible should not be affected by our proposals.

(paragraph 4.7; clause 1)

5.3 Parties intending to rely on hearsay evidence should be under a duty to give notice of that fact to all other parties to the proceedings wherever it is reasonable and practicable in the circumstances to enable those parties to deal with any matters arising from its being hearsay. This duty should be subject to any agreement, or any rules of court, to the contrary. Failure to comply with this duty should not effect the admissibility of the evidence but might attract costs or other sanctions at the court's disposal.

(paragraph 4.9 to paragraph 4.13; clause 2)

5.4 There should be a power for rules of court to be made to allow a party to call a witness whose evidence has been tendered as hearsay by another party, and to enable that party to cross-examine that person on the statement.

(paragraphs 4.14 to 4.16; clause 3)

5.5 Statutory guidelines should be provided for all courts to assist them to assess the weight they should attach to hearsay evidence.

(paragraphs 4.17 to 4.19; clause 4)

5.6 The requirement that the maker of a statement which is adduced as hearsay should be competent to give direct oral evidence should be retained, and that the date on which the statement was made should be the date on which the statement maker is required to satisfy this condition.

(paragraphs 4.26 to 4.28; clause 5)

5.7 Evidence should continue to be admissible to impeach or support the credibility of a person not called as a witness, and evidence tending to show that such a person made previous or later inconsistent statements, and has thereby contradicted himself, should also continue to be admissible.

(paragraph 4.29; clause 5)

5.8 Previous consistent or inconsistent statements of a person called as a witness should continue to be admissible as evidence of the matters stated.

(paragraphs 4.30 to 4.31; clause 6)

5.9 Adverse admissions should be admissible as hearsay statements under clause 1 of the draft Bill and should be subject to the notice and weighing provisions.

(paragraphs 4.32 to 4.34; clause 7)

5.10 The common law rules effectively preserved by section 9(1) and (2)(b) to (d) of the Civil Evidence Act 1968 concerning published works dealing with matters of a public nature, and public documents and records shall continue to have effect.

(paragraphs 4.32 to 4.34; clause 7)

5.11 Evidence of reputation or family tradition for certain specified purposes should be admissible as a fact and not as a statement or multiplicity of statements.

(paragraphs 4.32 to 4.34; clause 7)

5.12 Where a statement contained in a document is admissible as evidence in civil proceedings, it should be capable of being proved, by the production of that document, or by the production of a copy of that document, authenticated in such manner as the court might approve. It should be immaterial how many removes there are between a copy and the original.

(paragraph 4.37; clause 8)

5.13 Documents, including those stored by computer, which form part of the records of a business or public authority should be admissible as hearsay evidence under clause 1 of our draft Bill and the ordinary notice and weighing provisions should apply.

(paragraph 4.38; clause 1)

5.14 The current provisions governing the manner of proof of business records should be replaced by a simpler regime which allows, unless the court otherwise directs, for a document to be taken to form part of the records of a business or public authority, if it is certified as such, and received in evidence without being spoken to in court. No special provisions should be made in respect of the manner of proof of computerised records.

(paragraph 4.39 to 4.43; clause 9)

5.15 The absence of an entry should be capable of being formally proved by affidavit of an officer of the business or authority to which the records belong.

(paragraphs 4.40; clause 9)

5.16 The provisions we recommend should apply to all civil proceedings to which the strict rules of evidence apply.

(paragraphs 4.44 to 4.45; clause 10)

5.17 There should be power to make rules of court to make such provision as is necessary or expedient for putting into effect the provisions proposed in the draft Bill.

(paragraph 4.46; clause 11)

5.18 None of the above recommendations should affect the exclusion of evidence on grounds other than that it is hearsay. This should be the case whether the evidence falls to be excluded in pursuance of any enactment or rule of law or for failure to comply with rules of court or an order of the court.

(paragraph 4.48; clause 13)

* This material is Crown Copyright and is reproduced by permission

Return to Consultation Paper